Does anyone actually believe he was fined because of a fashion statement?

They don't just make up stupid ways to fine people for money. Uniforms have a code for various reasons. If you're trying to tackle Gore, you're going to aim for his legs. And if nobody has socks on, for example, you can't tell which team he's on. You can't only wear one sock either. And you can't wear different colored socks. If you could, then you might ask why players can't wear different colored pants, or shirts. And the answer is obvious. They're uniforms for a reason. Sock length is just a boundary between acceptable and unacceptable uniform wear because a boundary has to exist regardless, and it's not too much to ask to tell a player to pull his socks up.

Sorry to sound like Mr. Policeman here, but the rules are put in place by people who know the game a lot better than the average fan. Ultimately it amounts to a guy being fined 10 grand for wearing his socks low, but it's all a product of things like injury risk and game management.

You can't be stupid enough to think they're just trying to find ways to screw Frank Gore, or Goodell has a sock fetish. It's not an ancient footnote that was put in the rulebooks as a bet 100 years ago. There's a legitimate reason for every type of fine or rule whether you agree with it or not.

Just thought I'd let you know... It does sound pretty strange when you take it out of context though.

Does anyone actually believe he was fined because of a fashion statement?

They don't just make up stupid ways to fine people for money. Uniforms have a code for various reasons. If you're trying to tackle Gore, you're going to aim for his legs. And if nobody has socks on, for example, you can't tell which team he's on. You can't only wear one sock either. And you can't wear different colored socks. If you could, then you might ask why players can't wear different colored pants, or shirts. And the answer is obvious. They're uniforms for a reason. Sock length is just a boundary between acceptable and unacceptable uniform wear because a boundary has to exist regardless, and it's not too much to ask to tell a player to pull his socks up.

Sorry to sound like Mr. Policeman here, but the rules are put in place by people who know the game a lot better than the average fan. Ultimately it amounts to a guy being fined 10 grand for wearing his socks low, but it's all a product of things like injury risk and game management.

You can't be stupid enough to think they're just trying to find ways to screw Frank Gore, or Goodell has a sock fetish. It's not an ancient footnote that was put in the rulebooks as a bet 100 years ago. There's a legitimate reason for every type of fine or rule whether you agree with it or not.

Just thought I'd let you know... It does sound pretty strange when you take it out of context though.

very few people think that it is a rule to screw Gore over. It just seems excessive, and a tad inconsistent

Does anyone actually believe he was fined because of a fashion statement?

They don't just make up stupid ways to fine people for money. Uniforms have a code for various reasons. If you're trying to tackle Gore, you're going to aim for his legs. And if nobody has socks on, for example, you can't tell which team he's on. You can't only wear one sock either. And you can't wear different colored socks. If you could, then you might ask why players can't wear different colored pants, or shirts. And the answer is obvious. They're uniforms for a reason. Sock length is just a boundary between acceptable and unacceptable uniform wear because a boundary has to exist regardless, and it's not too much to ask to tell a player to pull his socks up.

Sorry to sound like Mr. Policeman here, but the rules are put in place by people who know the game a lot better than the average fan. Ultimately it amounts to a guy being fined 10 grand for wearing his socks low, but it's all a product of things like injury risk and game management.

You can't be stupid enough to think they're just trying to find ways to screw Frank Gore, or Goodell has a sock fetish. It's not an ancient footnote that was put in the rulebooks as a bet 100 years ago. There's a legitimate reason for every type of fine or rule whether you agree with it or not.

Just thought I'd let you know... It does sound pretty strange when you take it out of context though.

Just thought I'd let you know... It does sound pretty strange when you take it out of context though.

We know why there are uniform rules. It's not that they fined him for having his socks too low. It's that they fined him $10,500 for having his socks too low. And at the time the article was released, they still hadn't fined Brady for what he did.

And now that they have fined him $10,000 for doing what he did, fining Frank Gore $500 more than that because his socks were too low becomes even more ludicrous.

PLEASE understand that I am not defending the NFL's stupid system of fines, but it was explained to me that Gore's fine is high because he's a repeat offender and Brady's fine is low because it's a first offense.

PLEASE understand that I am not defending the NFL's stupid system of fines, but it was explained to me that Gore's fine is high because he's a repeat offender and Brady's fine is low because it's a first offense.

Don't shoot the messenger.

Gore is a repeat wardrobe offender? ha I have no problem fining him, maybe like 5k for it but 10.5 seems like a lot for something as simple as forgetting to pull up his socks. It's not like he intentionally wore different colored shoes like some players have and got penalized for

His son called him out on it too haha. After the game in the post show, Frank and his kid came up to be interviewed. They had his son ask one questions and he asked his dad "why were your pants so low". Frank tried to ignore it.

I don't like how Frank and Crabtree were fined for throwing balls to the fans after TDs too.